CALIHAWK1 wrote:I won't take to this argument as we won't change each others opinions. Wallace, Lienart, Quinn and Thigpen are not Jacksons caliber but if you want to ignore the obvious that's on you.

I don't really have anything against TJack, but he and Thigpen were on the same team last year and Thigpen was higher on the depth chart. That being said, I'd also probably rather have Jackson, but I just found the notion of "Jackson caliber" kind of funny. He was a third stringer last year and will likely be third string next year.

It is what it is. I didn't say Super Bowl caliber. I said Jackson caliber. Quinn, Lienart and Wallace arent that. You point out that that Thigpen was higher on t he depth chart last year yet the coach that made that decision was fired, Jackson was resigned and Thigpen was let go, so what does that really mean?

Smelly McUgly wrote: If so, there is only one spot left on this team at QB.

Come September, yes. Now? Not so fast. Russ, one-of-the-above FA, Portis, and draftee enter camp. Three men (maybe only two) come out with a job. You can't argue now using September-post final cutdown-logic.

Many teams go into camp with 4 QB.

Talent can get you to the playoffs.It takes character to win when you get there.SUPER BOWL XLVIII CHAMPIONS

I think Wallace is a definite upgrade to Jackson, He played ok when asked to fill in, pretty close to around 500 for us and that was with a far inferior team to what Jackson had last year. He's no starter but in a simple system with good weapons surrounding him and a stingy defense I think he would do decent if needed.

If you weren't around when Wallace was here you should o watch his highlights. He's got some skills just not the workaholic student of the game like Wilson.

CALIHAWK1 wrote:I would gladly take T-Jack over any of these clowns. Too bad he isn't available right now.

T-Jack wasn't even in consideration, and for a good reason.

You are blinded by unjust biased. Look at the records of those in consideration compared to T-Jack. Then ask teammates what they think.

Oh hell no,,,, Jackson couldn't beat out Flynn last Year, and Portis has already been re-signed, +, the Seahawks are bringing in a bunch of QB's for tryouts for RW's back-up.IF, T-Jack were all that, they'd have kept him last Year, and let Portis walk.Just because I don't prefer Jackson over those others, doesn't mean that I don't admire his toughness, and desire to fight through adversities.I just don't believe that he's a TD machine, and he took way too long to decide when to get rid of the ball, so long in fact, that he was sacked way more than he should have been.

scutterhawk wrote:[quote="CALIHAWK1"]I would gladly take T-Jack over any of these clowns. Too bad he isn't available right now.

T-Jack wasn't even in consideration, and for a good reason.

You are blinded by unjust biased. Look at the records of those in consideration compared to T-Jack. Then ask teammates what they think.

Oh hell no,,,, Jackson couldn't beat out Flynn last Year, and Portis has already been re-signed, +, the Seahawks are bringing in a bunch of QB's for tryouts for RW's back-up.IF, T-Jack were all that, they'd have kept him last Year, and let Portis walk.Just because I don't prefer Jackson over those others, doesn't mean that I don't admire his toughness, and desire to fight through adversities.I just don't believe that he's a TD machine, and he took way too long to decide when to get rid of the ball, so long in fact, that he was sacked way more than he should have been.[/quote]

scutterhawk wrote:Oh hell no,,,, Jackson couldn't beat out Flynn last Year, and Portis has already been re-signed, +, the Seahawks are bringing in a bunch of QB's for tryouts for RW's back-up.IF, T-Jack were all that, they'd have kept him last Year, and let Portis walk.Just because I don't prefer Jackson over those others, doesn't mean that I don't admire his toughness, and desire to fight through adversities.I just don't believe that he's a TD machine, and he took way too long to decide when to get rid of the ball, so long in fact, that he was sacked way more than he should have been.

They were not going to pay TJack his salary + Flynn's, especially with Russell proving himself so early on. Flynn's guaranteed money meant TJack was gone from the get go.

if this is REALLY as big a deal as people are making it.lets trade up in the draft and get Geno, he'd be a good back up behind RW...*sarcasm off*NOW i know back up qb is important. But this offense....not too hard to get the ball to Harvin, Tate, or Rice, Dont feel like that? Give it to lynch...not confident to hand it off or throw deep, Mr. Miller will find his way to the ball around the middle or the sidelines. With this team, i think just a capable QB could keep them going. so i dont think there is necessarily as wrong choice.Find the most capable, make them be handcuffed to RW watching game film. and let them enjoy the ride.

Wallace is the best of the 4. Thigpen is the most interesting (which isn't saying much). Leinart has no drive, even Joey Harrington thinks Matt Leinart is a quitter who's too eager to be a career backup (I'm joking). But I think I'd rather have Leinart over Brady Quinn. Quinn was abysmal last season, and if not for an extreme fluke game against Carolina, he would have finished with numbers worse than Ryan Lindley, and Lindley was historically bad. Like Curtis Painter, Brady Quinn is the kind of backup you want if you are hoping for a #1 pick (which hey KC, mission accomplished!).

Smelly McUgly wrote:Good take on this whole thing. I would be inclined to agree with you except that Portis got a two-year deal. I don't know how it's structured, to be sure, but that indicates that the Seahawks have plans for him to at least some degree. If so, there is only one spot left on this team at QB. I would prefer rolling with Manuel or Scott over any of the guys listed in the subject line of this thread. Heck, Washington got Kirk Cousins coached up enough to do fine taking over for RGIII in limited duty.

Of course, this is all conjecture pending the next few weeks, but I am desperate to talk Seahawk football and so this is my theory on the freaking QB2 position.

To the idea of going in to the season (a season as a serious Super Bowl contender) with a rookie as your back-up I'd say, "be careful what you wish for."

In other words, his team went 1-2 in games he saw any real significant time in ... and really he's the exception to the rule. Rookie QB's (in general) tend to lose far more games than they win.

I was going to say that a Russell Wilson comes along once every 20 years or so ... but that really and truly isn't accurate. In fact, it's more accurate to say that someone like him has never come along and did what he did ...

Best Seasons by a Rookie QB All Time (Sorted by TD’s Thrown) [Final 2012 Stats]

Name

Year

Comp

Att

Comp%

Yards

TD’s

INT’s

QB Rating

1. Russell Wilson

2012

252

393

64.1%

3,118

26

10

100.0

1. Peyton Manning

1998

325

575

56.7%

3,739

26

28

71.2

2. Cam Newton

2011

310

517

60.0%

4,051

21

17

84.5

3. Andrew Luck

2012

339

627

54.1%

4,374

23

18

76.5

4. Robert Griffin III

2012

249

375

66.4%

3,100

20

5

104.1

5. Dan Marino

1983

173

296

58.4%

2,210

20

6

96.0

6. Andy Dalton

2011

300

516

58.1%

3,398

20

13

80.4

7. Tom Brady

2001*

264

413

63.9%

2,843

18

12

86.5

8. Sam Bradford

2010

354

590

60.0%

3,512

18

15

76.5

9. Ben Roethlisberger

2004

196

295

66.4%

2,621

17

11

98.1

10. Matt Ryan

2008

265

434

61.1%

3,440

16

11

87.7

11. Joe Montana

1980*

176

273

64.5%

1,795

15

9

87.8

12. Joe Flacco

2008

257

428

60.0%

2,971

14

12

80.3

13. Brandon Weeden

2012

297

517

57.4%

3,385

14

17

72.6

14. Ryan Tannehill

2012

282

484

58.3%

3,294

12

13

76.1

15. Warren Moon

1984*

259

450

57.6%

3,338

12

14

76.9

16. Rick Mirer

1993

274

486

56.4%

2,833

12

17

67.0

17. Charlie Batch

1998

173

303

57.1%

2,178

11

6

83.5

18. Troy Aikman

1989

155

293

52.9%

1,749

9

18

55.7

19. John Elway

1983

123

259

47.5%

1,663

7

14

54.9

*Montana started 1 game in 1979, so while he wasn’t technically a rookie, 1980 was his first season as a starter. Same thing goes for Tom Brady, as he started 1 game in 2000. Warren Moon technically was a rookie by NFL standards, but he had played 6 seasons in the CFL and powered the Edmonton Eskimos to 5 Grey Cup victories.

Technically, the record books will have Russell Wilson and Peyton Manning tied for most TD's. However, check out his interception numbers and the number of attempts it took him to get to 26 TD's. Fairly impressive body of work there by Wilson. That table also highlights just how special of a rookie QB class this truly is ... and just how much of a passing league this has become.

Sure it SOUNDS good the idea of bringing in E.J. Manuel or Matt Scott to be Wilson's back-up ... but the reality of it is that IF (and I know it's a Big IF) Wilson goes down for any length of time a rookie will lose far more of those starts than a veteran would. In general, if given 6 starts, a rookie QB (given this Seahawks offense) probably wins only 2 or 3 of those.

A veteran QB on the other hand (like a Thigpen for example) ... probably wins 4 of those [to say nothing of playoff football games].

No amigo, I'm totally comfortable with the idea of a Manuel or Scott as our 3rd QB (with an eye on them being the back-up in a year or 2). As the back-up though? I'm feeling a lot more queesy about that idea.

BTW what David Seven said regarding Camp Fodder contracts is exactly correct. I know a lot of people are all a-twitter over TE David Fells for example. The reality of that is that he MIGHT make the practice squad this year.

I'd like Wallace out of that group. He is a proven back up QB. I would love EJ Manuel in the Draft but chances are we would have to use a 3rd round pick on him. If he fell to the fourth I would snatch him up in a heart beat. If we don't add through the Draft then I hope whoever we add through FA gets beat out by a much improved Portis in camp/preseason.

Anyone want to make me a new signature? I've held out hope long enough.95% of the time I'm viewing here and/or posting is being done on a mobile device. Pardon any spelling, punctuation, or grammar mistakes.

Think about it from this perspective: Percy Harvin is good at compensating for a so so quarterback and Golden Tate is starting to 'get it' when it comes to bailing out his QB. With the weapons at their disposal, I think Bevell could water down the offense and still have a good chance to win. If you thought our O was beastly last year, wait till this group starts to click.

If they wanted to pay for one of these players why didn't they sign them instead of Portis. Most of those so called QB's are going to want over a million dollars a year and none of them are worth it. Pass on all of them.

sutz wrote:Seneca Wallace was woefully mis-cast in Holmgren's more pure version of the WCO. He's actually more suited to our current offense IMHO. Mobile, strong armed, he has the physical tools. Mentally, well, that's why he'll be competing for the backup slot if he is signed.

Hey, it's not that we don't take this search seriously, it's that it's nice to actually not be worried about who starts next year.

Funny, after all those seasons with people complaining about QB threads, here we have another one, about the #2-3 slots.

I agree with this. Watching Wallace replace Hass in Holmgren's last season was painful, and not Wallace's fault. Holmgren was so stubborn that he tried to make Wallace play the WCO just like Hass instead of being flexible and playing to his strengths.

The more I think about it, I'm coming around to the Wallace idea. Basing some of it on Kearly's review of Quinn. Wallace is not a world beater but I don't think any of the current choices are either so in that regard he is likely the best option and with this team surrounding him I think he could do pretty well if needed. Also Bevell I suspect would do a better job than Holmgren did in play calling to his strengths and Wilson would likely be a very good influence on him also and he would know his role as the back up and fit in comfortably. He is a good locker room guy also.

Wallace is also visiting Oakland this weekend. Teams are still interseted, so I don't think he's necessarily washed up. If he's somewhere close to the same guy he was in Seattle, then this is a no-brainer. He always gave this team a shot when it needed him to come in. And those were much, much worse teams and a system that wasn't suited for him.

But regardless, NFL teams usually bring four QBs into camp. Just because we bring a vet QB in to compete, it doesn't mean he's going to stick. Very high possibility that the FA QB ends up as QB3 (behind a rookie) or cut. Hopefully, folks won't have a meltdown when one of these four guys is inevitably signed.

I'm not sure how anyone can argue Kirk Cousins saw 'significant time' in the game versus Seattle in the playoffs.

In fact I'd argue his contribution with just two passes against Baltimore was much more meaningful. Those two passes were vital. That game was over. He made two huge plays (TD score, then two point conversion) in the dying stages to take it to over time. Then a big kick return won it straight away in OT.

Man, it's a backup position. And when you're talking about that particular group, is there really a lot of difference between the "best of the four" and the "worst of the four"?

Given that none of them really have any career worth highlighting, why not make the judgment based on what they actually put in front of our coaching staff during the workout?

Now, I'll admit that I don't really care about Quinn one way or another, but I will say that it would be interesting to see how he might respond with a team that had some talent. He's been with Cleveland, KC, and Denver. None of those are really teams known for roster building and talent with the possible exception of Denver, and Quinn never saw the field there. And honestly, that's what I would expect from him in Seattle... never seeing the field.

Rat wrote:I used to be absurdly high on Brady Quinn. I still think he could have been something special had be been drafted by almost anyone else.

Ditto. Was very high on him early on. Of course, his numbers have been AWFUL thus far. However, he's only gotten playing time on terrible rosters, and he was sort of screwed over in Denver due to the public clamoring for Tebow. By all accounts, Quinn beat him out in camp and practice (not a huge accomplishment, but still...).

Never thought highly of Leinart or Thigpen ever, so this doesn't really bother me. Plus, it's back up QB. Who freakin' cares.

Interesting because Phil Simms on Brock this morning said he would prefer Quinn. Not a fan but maybe it's all about coaching with Brady Quinn. If you are interested you can find the link to the podcast here

Dosen't speak to his on field abilities, but I distinctly remember gaining a ton of respect for Quinn after how he handled the unfortunate Jovan Belcher incident last year, and the press conference he gave. Very eloquent and thoughtful.Definitely a guy who clearly always wants whats best for his team & teammates.

Notre Dame stunk before he got there, did well when he was there, and then stunk again after he left. Meanwhile, the Browns and Chiefs stunk before and after he was on those teams, so I wouldn't fully judge him by his stats in the NFL.

razgriz737 wrote:Huh. Out of those 4 QB's who were supposed to work out with us, he's probably the guy I wanted least. Oh well, just a backup.

That's where I'm at with this as well. But if Pete/JS think they can fit the guy in to the point where he'll be a decent backup (guy who can go at least 2-2 over a 4 game stretch, maybe 3-1 with this team) I guess I have to give them the benefit of the doubt.